• DocumentCode
    3534403
  • Title

    Evaluation of automatic striatal segmentation for the ECAT HRRT images

  • Author

    Tuna, Uygar ; Tohka, Jussi ; Farinha, Ricardo J P C ; Ruotsalainen, Ulla

  • Author_Institution
    Dept. of Signal Process., Tampere Univ. of Technol., Tampere, Finland
  • fYear
    2010
  • fDate
    Oct. 30 2010-Nov. 6 2010
  • Firstpage
    3001
  • Lastpage
    3004
  • Abstract
    In quantitative positron emission tomography (PET) brain studies, the temporal dynamics of the radiopharmaceutical are usually analyzed separately for different brain structures. In a clinical environment, the delineation of brain structures is still often performed manually by human experts. In this study, we concentrate on automatic segmentation of the striatal brain structures (caudate, posterior and anterior putamen and ventral striatum) from the binding potential (BPND) images derived based on [11C]-raclopride studies. Previously, a method for the automatic segmentation of the striatal structures was proposed for the ECAT high resolution research tomograph (HRRT, CTI PET Systems, Knoxville, TN, USA) BPND images. The method is based on clustering the affinity matrix (containing the features as intensity values, spatial connectivity and distance) of the striatum which is extracted by using a deformable surface model. In clustering, the method uses weighted kernel k-means algorithm. In this study, we evaluate the segmentation method with a test-retest dataset. We studied the segmentation differences between the analytical (3D-RP) and iterative (3D-OPOSEM) reconstructions of the ECAT HRRT data. In addition to visual comparisons, for different reconstruction methods, normalized absolute differences (NAD) between the segmented regions of test-retest BPND images were calculated. We observed that NAD values were within acceptable limits in most cases. However, the ventral striatum segmentation failed to some extent. Furthermore, it is obvious that robustness of this kind of brain structure extraction methods should be tested with various reconstruction methods.
  • Keywords
    brain; expectation-maximisation algorithm; image reconstruction; image segmentation; iterative methods; medical image processing; pattern clustering; positron emission tomography; 3D-RP reconstruction; ECAT HRRT images; PET; affinity matrix; anterior putamen; automatic striatal segmentation; brain; caudate; clustering; deformable surface model; high resolution research tomograph; intensity values; iterative 3D-OPOSEM reconstruction; normalized absolute differences; positron emission tomography; posterior putamen; radiopharmaceutical temporal dynamics; spatial connectivity; striatum; test-retest binding potential images; ventral striatum; weighted kernel k-means algorithm; Brain; Feature extraction; Image reconstruction; Image resolution; Image segmentation; Interpolation; Positron emission tomography; 3D OP-OSEM; 3D reprojection; clustering; feature extraction; gap-filling; high resolution research tomograph (ECAT HRRT); interpolation; positron emission tomography; quantitative evaluation; reconstruction;
  • fLanguage
    English
  • Publisher
    ieee
  • Conference_Titel
    Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record (NSS/MIC), 2010 IEEE
  • Conference_Location
    Knoxville, TN
  • ISSN
    1095-7863
  • Print_ISBN
    978-1-4244-9106-3
  • Type

    conf

  • DOI
    10.1109/NSSMIC.2010.5874348
  • Filename
    5874348